Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
Arun Kumar Mishra - Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. - Opposite Party
Criminal MISC. Bail Application No. 9861 of 2025
Decided On : 09-04-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of the prosecution story and allegations against the applicant. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. arguments presented by the applicant's counsel asserting innocence and questioning the prosecution's credibility. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 3. arguments from the state regarding the applicant's character and the seriousness of the allegations. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 4. court's observations on societal changes regarding relationships and the implications for legal proceedings. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 5. conclusion granting bail to the applicant with specific conditions. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45) |
JUDGMENT :
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Anup Triwedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Nitin Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Devendra Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case No.3227/IX/24 ( State vs. Arun Kumar Mishra ), arising out of Case Crime No.0035 of 2024, under Sections 323, 376, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Banda, during the pendency of trial.
PROSECUTION STORY:
4. The informant joined the Old Rajendra Nagar, New Delhi Branch of Yes Bank as Relationship Manager. The applicant is stated to be an account holder in the said bank. He is stated to have offered the victim/informant the job of his personal assistant in his company for a salary of Rs.75,000/- per month alongwith accommodation and other perks. The informant joined the company of the applicant after resigning from the bank on 2.1.2024.
5. On 12.1.2024 at about 09:30 p.m., the applicant is stated to have suddenly come to the house of the informant alongwith cold coffee and stated that he has got a huge profit in the company, as such, he shall give her gifts. After consuming the said coffee, the victim is stated to have got intoxicated, as such, the applicant disrobed her completely and committed rape with her as she could not resist being intoxicated by the said spiked coffee. The applicant is even stated to have video recorded the said act and subsequently started blackmailing her.
6. On 13.1.2024, the applicant took the victim by flight to Mumbai and got a room booked in Taj Hotel on the basis of her Aadhar Card. On 15.1.2024 the applicant took her to somewhere else and got her to sign on some papers and conducted Saptapadi and added vermilion to her forehead. On 16.1.2024 the duo returned to Delhi and the rape and unnatural offence continued thereafter.
7. On 17.2.2024, the applicant is stated to have come to the house of her aunt at Baberu, district Banda and committed rape with her by showing an indecent video of her and asked her to come alongwith him to Delhi where he shall marry her as he has divorced his wife and she was forced to go alongwith him to Delhi.
8. On 20.2.2024, the informant told the applicant that she was pregnant. On 4.3.2024, she was informed by the first wife of the applicant that he already has married three women prior to the informant and had children from each of them.
9. The victim was again forced by the applicant to come to Golden Tulip Hotel, Lucknow on 28.3.2024 and was raped again. The applicant is stated to have hit the victim, thereby, leading to termination of her pregnancy. The applicant is even stated to have taken possession of all the educational documents in original alongwith her clothes and ornaments and had promised to marry her in January, 2024.
10. The informant is stated to have gone to her parental home on 29.4.2024 to prepare for the said marriage, but subsequently, the applicant is stated to have refused to comply with the said promise of marriage telephonically and informed her that he had forged certain documents and had shown her marriage to have been solemnized at Arya Samaj Temple. The applicant is even st
Consent in relationships does not equate to rape unless proven that the promise of marriage was made with no intention to fulfill it; bail is the rule and imprisonment the exception.
Long-term consensual relationships cannot be criminalized as rape unless clear evidence of deceit or malicious intent is established.
The court emphasized the distinction between consensual relationships and allegations of rape, ruling that mere allegations without evidence of coercion do not suffice for criminal proceedings.
Misconception of fact – Merely because physical relations were established on a promise to marry, it would not, by itself, amount to rape.
The legal principle established is that consent given under a false promise of marriage must involve an active and reasoned deliberation, and the promise of marriage must have been a false promise gi....
Consent given under a false promise to marry must be proven as knowingly false from the outset for an accusation of rape to succeed; consensual relationships later turning sour do not invoke criminal....
(1) Misconception of fact – Failure to keep promise on a future uncertain date does not always amount to misconception of fact at inception of act itself.(2) Law holding that false promise to marriag....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
